I wouldn’t rule that out entirely. That said, you just have to wonder — even with a “shy voter” — unless they are diehard Trump, can they really come out given the questions over his character, the questions over his reliability, and now a campgaign in which it’s Trump against everyone else.

There have to be a lot of shy people who are going to take all of that on board, and I’m just not sure that’s going to happen.

With that statement, the Republican nominee — actually, a nominee who is running without the support of the Republican establishment — may have sealed his electoral fate. But, in the discussions, I focused on the wider concern that the unprecedented remark raises about the state of American politics beyond the vote.

“He Won Over Few Undecided People Last Night”

I’m getting tired of this with Trump. When he insults women, he’ll say, “Oh, I didn’t say that” or “It’s just a joke”. When he insulted Mexicans as “rapists” — “Oh, it’s just a joke”. When he insulted the parents of an American soldier killed in Iraq, “Oh, no, I didn’t really mean it that way.”

Look, you don’t run a series of jokes as a campaign for President, especially jokes that lead to division and hate. You don’t joke; you act Presidential. And this man, from Day 1 in the Republican primaries, has not acted that way.

“Yes, This is Very, Very Serious”

You need an American President, when we are in troubled times, who will listen to advisors, who will listen to other countries, and to be very deliberate about what happens. Trump is not that person….

Those Americans who support Trump — they’re not bad people. They’re angry, they’re fearful, they’re worried about what’s going to happen with their jobs and their communities. And Trump is exploiting that.

That’s going to have to be dealt with, even if Hillary Clinton wins the election on November 8.

“Trump Crossed a Line With Undecided Voters”

A 4-way conversation which also includes Northern Irish commentator Alex Kane; Bill Barnard of Democrats Abroad; and talk show host Charlie Wolf

Trump really undid himself with that one sentence that he will not accept the result of the election.

Whether they’re Republican or Democrat, most Americans take great pride in democracy, and they take great pride in the process.

By Trump effectively saying — even before a vote has been counted — “Oh, it’s all rigged against me. Everyone’s cheating me”, calling out an uprising when he loses on November 8, that’s going to cross a line. If not necessarily for his supporters, for those who were undecided about their vote.

Scott Lucas is Professor of International Politics at the University of Birmingham and editor-in-chief of EA WorldView. He is a specialist in US and British foreign policy and international relations, especially the Middle East and Iran. Formerly he worked as a journalist in the US, writing for newspapers including the Guardian and The Independent and was an essayist for The New Statesman before he founded EA WorldView in November 2008.

One thing is for sure…… If Trump loses and concedes it is not over.
.
He’s going to do something. Besides being prideful, he has a very strong and loyal base. It will be very easy for him to convince his base that they were screwed by the system. A system that needs to be changed. The majority of Americans want to #cleantheswamp.
.
Putin ate my homework.
.
Nostrovia!

Election 2016: EXPLOSIVE STUFF TODAY (FRIDAY) IN THE WASHINGTON POST
.
— Donald Trump’s extraordinary debate declaration sent the GOP scrambling to protect against what some in the party privately acknowledge could be a “landslide victory” for Clinton. Kelly Ayott finds herself down 8 points in New Hampshire in a race that could shift the Senate to the Democrats.”
.
—Conservative Charles Krauthammer on “Charles Krauthammer: My vote, explained.”
.
— Catherine Rampell asks “Who’s really rigging the election against Donald Trump?”
.
–The Fix: In several key states, early vote has shifted heavily to the Democrats
.
–Editorial Board: “In the debates, Clinton showed exactly why she should be president” (and why Trump should not).
.
— In Florida, Obama blasts Rubio’s support of Trump as ‘the height of cynicism’ (MORE…)

—- For the second night in a row, Donald Trump pooped his pants in public–this time at a Catholic charity roast where candidates are expected to engage in good natured ribbing. Trump must have confused this group with his usual “lock ’em up’ crowds. He was repeatedly booed as he talked of “Crooked Hillary” and accused his opponent of being “anti-Catholic. — Conservative Jennifer Rubin on “At charity dinner, Trump reminds us he is a crude, mean boor.”

TRUMP WOULD HAVE WON HANDILY IN 2016 IF THE USA HAD EUROPE’S ELECTORAL SYSTEM
…
Populist/fascist movements almost took over America in 2012 as they’ve taken Venezuela, the Philippines, Austria, Russia ( France or Germany next?) A prolonged crisis and a talented demagogue are required for their success. If we also had general elections based proportional representation (parties get seats based on their share of the vote and those with less than 5 percent get none) Trump with 40% of the votes (and seats) would be King of the Hill today as other parties split the votes. The GOP primary shows how it works.. Trump prevailed only because 17 stubborn rivals split the vote. Having seized control of the party, why would Trump’s faction give it up? Won’t they dictate the GOP nominee in 2020? Won’t that assure another Democrat landslide, given demographic trends and the same plurality based general elections in which opponents of extremism can unite behind one party?
(I look at an important question some of you may be asking in a coming sub post).

QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF:
.
1. The economic crisis in the thirties was much worse and we had similar demagogues (Father Coughlin, Huey Long). Why did Trump come much closer? ANSWER: The others were either too regional or too parochial. Also, Trump benefits from his background in reality TV. He also bnefits from alt-right internet, Russ Limbaugh, Alex Jones, Drudge, Breibart, etc. in firing things up. Also, Putin, Russian disinformation, Russian intelligence hackers and Russian money were not a factor in the l930’s.
.
2. Can GOP moderates and conservatives retake the party from the Trump/Breibart faction and change the primary rules by 2020? ANSWER: Having taken control, I doubt the extremists will give it up. If they don’t get the rules and candidates of their choice again, they may defect and form a new party or stay home. (one more question to come)

3. Would Gary Johnson and Jill Stein have benefitted if we had proportional rep in 2012?

ANSWER: Democrats and Hillary would be the big loser, splitting into-centrist,
left and progressive. Stein and Greens might win a few seats or possibly none at all. GOP conservatives would likely have split into at least two parties (McMullen, Cruz) and possibly three (Rubio). Gary Johnson would be more likely to lose votes to one of those parties than gain votes. Trump would likely
hold all or most of his 40% against all these parties. No other party would come close. For Trump, proportional representation would allow him to divide and conquer. Putin in Russia, like Milosevic in Yuroslavia used to encourage and even finance as many small democratic parties as possible rather than see moderates unite under one party. Naturally many of these small pro-democracy parties would not meet the 5% minimum required for a share of seats.

Readers here have as much chance of winning the top prize in Saturday’s Powerball as Trump has of winning the presidency.
…
LANDSLIDE? Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight has Hillary at 340 electoral votes (+ 70 above what is need. Hillary has the entire West and East Coasts except for Geogia where she is gaining and South Carolina. Hillary leads in four of five southwest states. She leads in every state adjacent to Canada except Idaho, Montana and South Dakota. GOP is on verge of losing the Senate.

The Clinton Institute is a sponsor of this blog and its adverts are posted here.http://www.ucdclinton.ie/about_background“In May 2001, the Government of Ireland recommended that an Institute for American Studies should be established in Ireland. It also decided that it should be named for the 42nd President of the United States, President William Jefferson Clinton, in recognition of his own crucial and personal role, as well as those of the United States Government, Congress and people, in the Irish Peace Process.”
QUID PRO QUO.

No, it is not a sponsor. It is a partner of this website in academic and journalistic projects. It is given space on the EA homepage in recognition of that partnership.

And the Irish Government endowed the Institute and named it after Bill Clinton to recognize his role in the Good Friday Agreement — as you helpfully point out. Clinton finally visited the Institute in 2010 and signed a copy of the Good Friday Agreement (he did not sign it initially — it was his envoy George Mitchell who did so). Chelsea Clinton has also spoken at the Institute.

That is the extent of the Clintons’ connection to the Institute’s activities.

Who is this BBC guy talking about the system being rigged?
.
Please let him know that millions of Americans are jumping aboard the Trump Train for that very reason. The system is rigged. We have a man/ (Trump) who is finally the voice for millions of Americans who know the system is rigged.
.
I’m a democrat. My wife is a democrat. We are on the Trump Train.

Scott, is BBC mentioning Project Veritas?
.
Now you can laugh at Trump’s claim that the system is rigged, but when CNN and other the other major outlets avoid or give it little exposure, it’s obvious the system is rigged.
.
It’s one scandal after another with Hillary. Many people are seeing that the system is protecting her.